How to become the LDS President

[Tacenda]

I think out of all my bishops there were two or three that didn't make a higher than average living. One was a carpenter and we were friends with their family and lived on the same street.

A diary entry from Leonard Arrington’s biography reveals “Things I don’t like about the church” of the church historian…

“Appointing the highest tithe payers to positions of leadership rather than the most capable or worthy. In choosing stake leaders, the General Authority comes with a list of the 15 or 20 highest tithe payers and starts down the list to choose a stake president and high council.”

Leonard Arrington, in Greg Prince’s Leonard Arrington and the Writing of Mormon History, (Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press, 30 May 2016), 132.

So will your income determine high leadership perhaps?

Edited December 27, 2021 by Tacenda

[JustAnAustralian]

8 hours ago, Tacenda said:

A diary entry from Leonard Arrington’s biography reveals “Things I don’t like about the church” of the church historian…

“Appointing the highest tithe payers to positions of leadership rather than the most capable or worthy. In choosing stake leaders, the General Authority comes with a list of the 15 or 20 highest tithe payers and starts down the list to choose a stake president and high council.”

Leonard Arrington, in Greg Prince’s Leonard Arrington and the Writing of Mormon History, (Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press, 30 May 2016), 132.

Not sure when that specific diary entry was written, but GAs are not currently involved with choosing members of the high council.

And if they're going for high tithe payers, they've dropped the ball with all the stake presidents I can remember having.

Of course, when you say have a stake of say 1000 active people

1000 active=>500 males=>125 appropriate age range (25-60)=>100 married =>75 active TR =>35 HP (since you're unlikely to call someone who isn't already a HP)=>18 current/former bishopric or stake presidency (so they actually have some of the experience needed). Which will then drop even further once employment, health, and family are taken into account. So chances are that a list of the top tithe payers is the same group of people who would be statically appropriate anyway.

Having been involved in the process of a new stake presidency being called, trust me, if the GA used a tithing list to choose, it would be a lot easier than it actually is.

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by JustAnAustralian

[Hamba Tuhan]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

“Appointing the highest tithe payers to positions of leadership rather than the most capable or worthy. In choosing stake leaders, the General Authority comes with a list of the 15 or 20 highest tithe payers and starts down the list to choose a stake president and high council.”

I'm unsure what Mr Arrington's experience was, but he's exactly wrong about everything here:

1. The visiting authorities don't come with a list; rather, that list is provided for them by the current stake presidency, with input (in my experience) from other stake leaders and bishops. (ETA: those interviewed are also asked for recommendations, and if their recommendations aren't already on the list, someone rings them to come in for an interview.)
2. Having twice been the person to compile this list, I can verify that we had zero access to amount of tithing paid, and the only time that tithing entered into our discussions was to verify that the person was a full-tithe payer.
3. As already noted, visiting authorities do not choose the members of the high council. Such members continue their service from one stake presidency to the next, and if one needs to be replaced at some point, it is the stake presidency that does so, with the approval of the high council.

So yeah, I'm calling shenanigans.

Edited December 28, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan

[Calm]

Quote

From a diary entry dated August 17, 1992, Arrington expressed his frustration with several organizational aspects of the church. He titled this entry “Things I don’t like about the church.” This was his list:

Arrington lived in Utah as far as I know during this time. Perhaps things were done differently.
 

It was his diary, but he was a historian so I wonder if he would write something carelessly as fact when it wasn’t (as in it felt like that was how names were come up with, but it wasn’t really.  The few times I have written a diary, I can get sarcastic and often over state stuff when I am ticked. 
 

But if this was a common practice, I would think someone else would have mentioned it besides him. 

Edited December 28, 2021 by Calm

[SkyRock]

My father served as stake president in the 80s in California.  He was not rich or educated (never graduated from college).  He had been a counselor in the previous stake presidency, before that bishop.

He recently mentioned that he sometimes felt awkward at dinners and meetings with other stake presidents, as most were professionals of some sort. 

His successor was a high school principal whose successor was a small home improvement contractor (oddly, all three were from my ward).

We had some pretty rich folks in our stake, but they didn't become stake president.

 

[mfbukowski]

15 minutes ago, SkyRock said:

My father served as stake president in the 80s in California.  He was not rich or educated (never graduated from college).  He had been a counselor in the previous stake presidency, before that bishop.

He recently mentioned that he sometimes felt awkward at dinners and meetings with other stake presidents, as most were professionals of some sort. 

His successor was a high school principal whose successor was a small home improvement contractor (oddly, all three were from my ward).

We had some pretty rich folks in our stake, but they didn't become stake president.

 

I have never had a "rich" SP except one who left the church and family for a gay lifestyle 

[SkyRock]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

I have never had a "rich" SP except one who left the church and family for a gay lifestyle 

Professionals like doctors, lawyers, and dentists, yes, but not the ultra rich.   I don't live where there are billionaires, though we do have a lot of professionals....

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I have never had a "rich" SP except one who left the church and family for a gay lifestyle 

I have had a few. It is often more convenient for them to serve. They often have greater flexibility in their schedules and less worries about their economic future. I have also had Stake Presidents that make more in the realm of middle-class or upper middle class incomes. The only Stake Presidents I have had that were struggling financially were usually running their own business. It often gave them flexibility with time at least. 

[The Nehor]

At the risk of opening a can of worms the only time I heard about General Authorities asking Stake leadership who might have spare money was when they were canvassing for donations when gay marriage proposals were being fought. I only have it second-hand but they were very cautious to try not to be pushy or demanding. They called the members and asked them and were very clear this was not an expectation if the person could not afford to or would rather not donate. All my information comes from one area though and it may have been handled differently elsewhere.

[Calm]

19 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I have had a few. It is often more convenient for them to serve. They often have greater flexibility in their schedules and less worries about their economic future. I have also had Stake Presidents that make more in the realm of middle-class or upper middle class incomes. The only Stake Presidents I have had that were struggling financially were usually running their own business. It often gave them flexibility with time at least. 

About the same here.

[Duncan]

Our Stake recently split, our current SP isn't wealthy or have much of a personality but he's okay. Our SP who got released in like 2015? was fairly rich but a HUGE jerk and actually got canned from his job as a CEO. He's now in the temple presidency but not the president thank heavens. I highly doubt he'll be picked up as the next temple president as he's almost 80. 

[Stargazer]

On 12/27/2021 at 4:07 PM, Tacenda said:

I think out of all my bishops there were two or three that didn't make a higher than average living. One was a carpenter and we were friends with their family and lived on the same street.

I've had bishops with all kinds of socioeconomic backgrounds. In my previous ward, during my 30-some year residency, started with a businessman with a fairly wealthy family, next was an architect, then a state trooper, followed by a human resources guy, a retired airline pilot, then two guys in a row who were both multimillionaires (one a businessman and the next was his next-door neighbor, an orthodontist), a civil engineer, and now a retired federal employee. 

On 12/27/2021 at 4:07 PM, Tacenda said:

A diary entry from Leonard Arrington’s biography reveals “Things I don’t like about the church” of the church historian…

“Appointing the highest tithe payers to positions of leadership rather than the most capable or worthy. In choosing stake leaders, the General Authority comes with a list of the 15 or 20 highest tithe payers and starts down the list to choose a stake president and high council.”

That sounds very odd.

However, If a GA comes to choose both a stake president and high council, that sounds like he's there to organize a new stake. I've never been in on the organization of a new stake, but I did come on the heels of one. I served my mission within the boundaries of a new stake in Germany (about the time when the church started making nearly all the districts in Germany into stakes). This was the Dortmund stake back in 1970ish. To the best of my understanding, no stake leaders were particularly wealthy. As for the organization of the high council, I know one brother who had been the president of the branch of my first city. He was slated to be called as bishop of his new ward, but the GA changed his mind at the last minute and had him put into the high council. And why? Because the brother had worn a beard, which the GA said wasn't usually expected for a bishop, but then said nevermind he looked good in it. Then the brother shaved his beard off, and the GA was impressed by his obedience (even though he hadn't been asked to do it). So he had him called into the HC instead, and called another to be bishop.

I can think of one way that a list of the highest tithe-payers might be useful as a guide, however. People who pay a lot of tithing are generally fairly intelligent and effective leaders, either in their own business or their regular employment. You don't become wealthy or prosperous by being an an idiot or without having a degree of leadership ability. So a list of high tithe-payers might well be a proxy for leadership skills.

I've watched General Authorities at work selecting a new stake president, though. In all three cases where I was able to observe the process, I can testify that the men chosen were in fact the ones the Lord chose. Because I had a spiritual witness of their calls -- either the person was the Lord's choice, or else the Lord just shrugged and said, "Oh, well, I guess I can work with him, though I might have preferred someone else." In the one case where I was directly involved as the president of one of the branches, I was interviewed by Elder Robert D. Hales (then of the Seventy, later of the Twelve), and I could tell that he was looking for the next stake president, not just going through the motions. And the man who was chosen was who the Lord chose.

If the GA doesn't know the members of the stake from Adam, he better have a good rapport with the Almighty if he's going to do the job properly. And be able to discern who people are, too.

 

[Nevo]

Prior to a stake conference with a visiting authority, the authority is provided with a confidential tithing report that lists the occupations and self-declared tithe-paying status of the stake presidency, executive secretary, stake clerks, high councilors, stake patriarch, and bishops (full, part, or non).

The report does not list tithing amounts, nor does it identify the "15 or 20 highest tithe payers" in the stake. Brother Arrington was either misinformed or imagining things.

[Stargazer]

2 minutes ago, Nevo said:

Prior to a stake conference with a visiting authority, the authority is provided with a confidential tithing report that lists the occupations and self-declared tithe-paying status of the stake presidency, executive secretary, stake clerks, high councilors, stake patriarch, and bishops (full, part, or non).

The report does not list tithing amounts, nor does it identify the "15 or 20 highest tithe payers" in the stake. Brother Arrington was either misinformed or imagining things.

As our stake clerk, I've helped prepare that report, and you're right there is no asking for tithing amounts -- in fact, the form doesn't include an indicator for tithing status. 

However, and I mentioned this in my post above, the Arrington journal mention specifically talked about including the selection of the high council as well as president. The visiting authority only has input into the choice of high council members when a brand-new stake is being organized. And it might be the case that he gets a more detailed report in such a case -- a report such as that would not come from the stake, since the stake isn't yet organized.